A political economy analysis of the 1992, 1999 and 2003 CAP reforms
General Material Designation
[Thesis]
First Statement of Responsibility
Cunha, Arlindo Marques
.PUBLICATION, DISTRIBUTION, ETC
Name of Publisher, Distributor, etc.
University of Reading
Date of Publication, Distribution, etc.
2007
DISSERTATION (THESIS) NOTE
Dissertation or thesis details and type of degree
Ph.D.
Body granting the degree
University of Reading
Text preceding or following the note
2007
SUMMARY OR ABSTRACT
Text of Note
The implementation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)-started in the early 1960s and soon became the object of a large array of criticisms. However, it was not until 1992 t~at a substantial reform was adopted, even th~ugh some sectorial me~sures had been undertaken before, in order to overcome surplus production and sharp budgetary crises. From 1992 to 2003, the CAP experienced three multi-sector wide-scope reforms, which implied a substantial shift in its policy instruments: the 199iMac Sharry reform, the 1999 Agenda 2000 reform and the 2003 Fischler reform. The aim of this study is to contribute to a better understanding of those CAP _reform processes, attempting to respond to three key questions: why did the reforms come to the political agenda at a given time; which factors were more determinant in influencing their final configurations; and why was the CAP mostly unchanged for thirty years, and then underwent almost a revolution in a short period ofless than fifteen years? Two different, and complementary, approaches will be adopted. t- The first consists of an eclectic political economy inspired analysis of the CAP reform processes on the basis of a structured framework. It is based on factual historic reports, published literature, and personal experience. Coherently with that framework, the analysis of each reform will consider three major points: the economic and social context; an overview of the reform process; and an assessment of the different factors that motivated the reform proposal and ofthose that influenced and determined its final configuration. The second approach consists of launching a two round Delphi process to gather the views of a panel of experienced players who took active part in the three reforms considered. As in the former approach, the aim is to get a live, first-hand, evaluation of what were the more influential factors in the two steps of the CAP policy-making process: the presentation of the proposals and the negotiation. The study concludes that CAP refonns occurred either in response to strong economic and political pressures taking place at a given time, or as a result of the reformist agenda of the ED Commission; and that the Agricultural Council is in general reluctant to accept reform but, once negotiations are underway, the active bargaining games taking place in the Council nonnally result in a weakening of the refonn proposals in order to accommodate the interests of the member states.